Rabbi Dr. Yuval Sherlow, rosh yeshiva of the Petach Tikvah Hesder Yeshiva announced today, Tuesday 25 Shevat 5773 that the MKs of the Bayit Yehudi Party “do not have to listen to the rabbis”.
Rabbi Sherlow’s opinion is sought after in the dati leumi world as he is viewed as a major rav and thinker, affiliated with the Tzohar rabbonim and an audible voice on many issues of modern Israeli life and Halacha.
The rabbi is quoted on the dati leumi Srugim website as follows. “HaGaon HaRav Sherlow Shlita is asked. We learn in the Torah ועשית ככל אשר יורוך. Your party says it will not listen to Gedolei Yisrael and therefore, the members are thereby transgressing the Torah. Then why do you not write they are compelled to listen to the Chachamim as we learn, even that the right is left and the contrary?”
The Rav Responds:
There are a great many things that can be written on the many assumptions appearing in your question. I will respond in short.
First of all the title HaGaon please reserve for the true Geonim. Second, the party is not mine and in general, I feel that rabbonim do not have to give advice to the politicians other than in the spiritual realm. I have written a psak on this in the past.
The MKs are shluchim of the tzibur, elected by the tzibur, and therefore they owe their allegiance to the people who put them in office. They have one responsibility, to carry out this shlichus.
This was the case back then against Sharon and the Disengagement and at the time with Rabin vis-à-vis the Golan Heights. This is what we must demand of ourselves and from our MKs. If the MKs of Yahadut Hatorah or Shas do not adhere to the words of their Gedolei Torah, they are thieves for having stolen the votes. That is their shlichus.
On the other hand, we must differentiate between the Halacha and the responsibility of the Bayit Yehudi MKs. Even if they were to approach me to become the party’s posek, I would tell them that they may not do so even it leads to decisions that I feel are erroneous on their part.
It is understood that it is a good thing if they were to consult with Gedolei Yisrael and Chachamim. It is generally good for a person to reach a decision based on dialogue and a feeling that he does not know everything. Not just that but the spiritual world can provide them proper spiritual direction, which is its job. However, the compliance must be to the voter, and that’s their halacha!
This is the reality that exists in which the Bayit HaYehudi voted for the party. They committed to preserve the Torah word; they committed to act to compel people to give to the state and society; they committed to be the representatives of the non-frum community that elected them. It is not too difficult a task and you can (in this context) stand by it, filling it optimally regarding the three promises. Therefore, if you asked me what they should do, this is my response.
(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
11 Responses
This guy is the Avi Weiss of Israel.
Quite a vague answer, not the usual Black and White that we are accustomed to.
#2 – It is the fault of the translation. Summing up from the Hebrew, Harav Sherlow answered Thus:
A.Every MK is a shaliach and must act as one.
B Each Mk is a shaliach of those who voted for him/his party, and must answer to them.
C.
מושבע ועמוד מהר סיני. Halacha is you follow the halacha, irregardless of any promise to your voters.
And how does the typical unlearned MK (Bennet for example) know what the halacha is? You consult with rabbonim, and see what the torah dictates for the situation.
very sensational headline
he took that right out of his “short sleeves”, making very little sense.
not to mention, he dug his foot deep into his mouth…
#2 – It is the fault of the translation. After reading the answer as reported in Hebrew I would describe his line of thought like this:
A. Every MK is a shaliach and must act as one.
B Each MK is a shaliach of those who voted for him/his party, and must represent them and answer to them.
C. The instructions given to the MKs by the voters are to meet, as best they can, the goals, promises and policies the party presented to the public to solicit their votes.
D. Those goals, promises and policies differ from party to party.
E. The Charedi parties represented to their voters that they would be the emissaries of the Charedi Gdolim and would follow their instructions, effectively transferring decision making to them. Therefore, that is what they must do.
F. The Bayit Hayehudi made no such representation and, in fact, represented to their voters that they would directly represent them, including the Chilonim whose votes were solicited. Therefore, the Bayit Hayehudi MKs may not transfer decision making to rabbis, including himself.
G. The Bayit Hayehudi’s MKs decision making duty must be fulfilled with care. To that end, an MK may and should solicit knowledge and advice before making decisions, including advice from rabbis and experts in pertinent fields.
The bottom line is that Mks of the Bayit Hayehudi MAY NOT RECEIVE ORDERS from rabbis instructing them how to vote. The added implication is that, on the hot button question of the day – that of ‘sharing the burden’, it would be proper for them to seek THE OPINION of rabbis, in order to better inform themselves before making their decisions.
I hope this helped.
#1 – Harav Sherlow Shlit”a – “This guy” in your parlance, is a Rosh Yeshiva, a Talmid Chacham (a talmid muvhak of Harav Lichtenstein Shlit”a) and is held in high regard by rivevot bnai yisrael. If you have a difference of opinion with him (although I see no evidence of one in your remark), there is a proper way to frame it.
so i guess harav ovadia was right in calling it a bayit of goyim
His answer makes a person think…something that is forbidden in some circles.
The headline of the post has nothing to do with the substance of Rav Sherlow’s response, though one supposes such a headline was written because there is somehow a heter to distort the words of a rosh yeshiva/talmid chacham when he isn’t chareidi.
The substance of Rav Sherlow’s tshuva is this: HaBayit HaYehudi ran on a specific platform with specific operating principles. For it to change its platform and operating principles after the election is to cheat those who voted for it, and this idea holds true for every party. Had HaBayot HaYehudi from the get-go (pre-election) declared that it was following the specific instructions (daas Torah) of Rabbis X or Y, and the voters voted for them on this premise, then the party would be obligated to follow through.
I will also note that the photo accompanying this article is that of Naftali Bennett and not of the bearded Rav Sherlow; perhaps this too was meant to someone convey a false image of Rav Sherlow as a beardless, ultramodern rabbi.
so even if thare trying to destroy the Torah world they have an obligation to their voters.
What nonsense ?
He says they should give advice in the spiritual realm. I think destroying the yeshivas is pretty spiritual
What do you think ?
That is the difference between daati leumi and chareidi
We alsways listen to our Rabbis – As it says you must listen to your Rabbis if they tell you the left is right and the right is left >